==== Front J Intensive Care J Intensive Care Journal of Intensive Care 2052-0492 BioMed Central London 677 10.1186/s40560-023-00677-0 Research Association of body mass index with mortality of sepsis or septic shock: an updated meta-analysis Bai Le 1 Huang Jingyi 2 Wang Dan 1 Zhu Dongwei 1 Zhao Qi 1 Li Tingyuan 1 Zhou Xianmei zhouxianmeijsszyy@163.com 13 Xu Yong njzyyxuyong@163.com 4 1 grid.410745.3 0000 0004 1765 1045 Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, 210029 People’s Republic of China 2 grid.412585.f 0000 0004 0604 8558 Baoshan Branch, Shuguang Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China 3 grid.412676.0 0000 0004 1799 0784 Department of Respiratory Medicine, Jiangsu Province Hospital of Chinese Medicine, 155 Hanzhong Road, Nanjing, 210029 Jiangsu Province People’s Republic of China 4 grid.410745.3 0000 0004 1765 1045 School of Chinese Medicine, School of Integrated Chinese and Western Medicine, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, 138 Xianlin Road, Nanjing, 210029 Jiangsu Province People’s Republic of China 3 7 2023 3 7 2023 2023 11 279 5 2023 22 6 2023 © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. Background The effects of body mass index (BMI) on mortality of sepsis remain unknown, since previous meta-analyses have reported conflicting results. Several observational studies published recently have provided new evidence. Thus, we performed this updated meta-analysis. Methods PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochran Library were searched for articles published before February 10, 2023. Observational studies that assessed the association of BMIs with mortality of sepsis patients aged > 18 years were selected. We excluded studies of which data were unavailable for quantitative synthesis. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were the effect measure, which were combined using fixed-effect or random-effect models. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was applied for quality assessment. Subgroups analyses were conducted according to potential confounders. Results Fifteen studies (105,159 patients) were included in the overall analysis, which indicated that overweight and obese BMIs were associated with lower mortality (OR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.70–0.88 and OR: 0.74, 95% CI 0.67–0.82, respectively). The association was not significant in patients aged ≤ 50 years (OR: 0.89, 95% CI 0.68–1.14 and OR: 0.77, 95% CI 0.50–1.18, respectively). In addition, the relationship between morbidly obesity and mortality was not significant (OR: 0.91, 95% CI 0.62–1.32). Conclusions Overweight and obese BMIs (25.0–39.9 kg/m2) are associated with reduced mortality of patients with sepsis or septic shock, although such survival advantage was not found in all crowds. Trial registration The protocol of this study was registered in PROSPERO (registration number CRD42023399559). Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40560-023-00677-0. Keywords Sepsis Mortality Body mass index Obesity Meta-analysis issue-copyright-statement© The Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine 2023 ==== Body pmcBackground Sepsis is characterized clinically by life-threatening organ dysfunction, resulting from a dysregulated host response to severe systemic infection [1]. In 2017, the sepsis-related deaths were estimated 11.0 million, accounting for approximately 20% of global deaths, and it has become the leading cause of in-hospital mortality [2]. Obesity was reported to be associated with increased risk of sepsis [3], and more than one-quarter of adults admitted to intensive care units (ICU) have obese or overweight body mass indexes (BMI). In animal models, it was demonstrated that obesity could enhance sepsis-induced organ injury [4–6]. Thus, it is reasonable to speculate that obese BMI could worsen clinical outcomes. Surprisingly, clinical studies have reported mixed results. A systematic review revealed that obesity may decrease, increase, or not affect the survival [7]. Based on this, Pepper et al. undertook a meta-analysis and found that overweight and obese patients with sepsis were at a decreased risk of death [8]. Nevertheless, another meta-analysis conducted by Wang et al. suggested that overweight, rather than obesity or morbid obesity could reduce the mortality of patients with sepsis [9]. Consecutive meta-analyses and systematic reviews have failed to reach a consensus. An obvious limitation of these previously published studies is that evidence from prospective studies was insufficient. Moreover, it was discovered that the association between obesity and outcomes of interest could be confounded [10]. However, bias analyses were not performed in prior meta-analyses due to insufficient included studies, and the issues remain unsolved till now. Therefore, we conducted an updated meta-analysis, including current available studies, to summarize the latest and most comprehensive evidence. We also performed subgroup analyses according to possible biases, intending to better clarify the association between obesity and mortality of sepsis. Methods We undertook and reported the meta-analysis and systematic review in accordance with Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) proposal [11]. Please see the MOOSE checklist in Additional file 1. Two researchers (Le Bai and Jingyi Huang) were in charge of literature retrieval, data extraction, and quality assessment of eligible studies independently. A third researcher (Dan Wang) would be consulted if the disputation could not be resolved by discussion. Literature search and study selection We performed the literature search without any language restriction in the following electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Articles published before February 10, 2023 were retrieved. Please see the detailed search strategy in Additional file 2. Observational studies that evaluated the association between obesity and mortality of patients diagnosed with sepsis or septic shock were included. The outcomes should be short-term (˂ 30 days) mortality. BMI was utilized as the measure of obesity in our study, which was calculated as the following formula: BMI = weight (kg)/height × height (m2). The control groups were patients with normal BMIs (18.5–24.9 kg/m2) while the exposure groups consisted of patients with abnormal BMIs. The following studies were excluded: (1) studies that recruited patients aged ˂ 18 years; (2) studies with incomplete data for the systematic review and meta-analysis; (3) studies that did not select patients with normal weight as control groups; (4) studies in which BMI was considered as a continuous variable rather than a categorical variable; (5) studies published in the forms of letter, comment or conference abstract. In addition, we selected odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) as the effect measure, since most individual studies have reported ORs. Thus, studies that reported relative risk (RR) or hazard ratio (HR) were not included in the quantitative synthesis in case of potential bias. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment Extracted data included author, study design, country or region, publication year, population characteristics of included study, diagnostic criteria of sepsis (or septic shock), definition of exposure and control groups, outcome, and adjusted covariates in each study. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) was employed for quality evaluation of eligible studies [12]. The details of the scale and standards of grading are provided in Additional file 3. It was designed to evaluate the quality of non-randomized controlled trials and has been the most widely used tool for observational studies in systematic reviews [13]. The scale consisted of three parts, which were aimed to evaluated the risk of selection bias (comparability between control and exposure groups), information bias (ascertainment of exposure and outcome), and confounding bias. Several other factors (e.g., age, study design) were also reported to be clinically relevant to the mortality of sepsis [8, 10], which could confound the real effects of obesity on mortality of sepsis. These issues have not been addressed in previous meta-analyses [8, 9]. Thus, in the present meta-analysis, subgroup analyses were undertaken to further investigate whether obesity and sepsis are truly associated. In addition, publication bias was evaluated using the funnel plot. Data synthesis and statistical analysis In the quantitative synthesis, comparisons were made between patients with normal BMIs versus those with abnormal BMIs. OR with 95% CI was selected as the effect measure. Forest plots were employed to show the results for effects of obesity on mortality of sepsis. I-squared (I2) statistics was used for assessment of the heterogeneity. Random-effect model was selected if the heterogeneity was high (I2 > 50%). Otherwise, the fixed-effect model would be selected. We conducted all statistical analyses using Stata 15.0 (Stata Corp, College Station, Texas, USA). Results Study selection and characteristics of eligible studies A total of 9633 records were yielded from all databases, according to the initial retrieval. After removing the duplicates, we screened titles and abstracts of rest literature, and obtained 32 potentially eligible articles. We then reviewed the full text and included 15 studies in the quantitative synthesis. The process of study selection is presented in Fig. 1.Fig. 1 The flow chart of study selection Three prospective studies [14–16] and 12 retrospective studies [17–28] were included in the present meta-analysis. Ten studies were from the United States [17–26], two were from Korea [14, 15], one was from Austria [28], and the other two were multicenter studies [16, 27]. These studies were published between 2008 and 2023. The subjects were patients with sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock, and the sample size ranged from 301 to 55,038. In most studies (12 of all) [14–17, 19, 20, 22–25, 27, 28], the diagnoses were based on the criteria defined on the three international conferences (i.e., Sepsis 1.0, Sepsis 2.0, and Sepsis 3.0 criteria) [1, 29, 30]. In two studies [18, 21], sepsis and septic shock were diagnosed according to the diagnostic codes in databases, and the diagnostic criteria were not available in one study[26]. The outcomes included ICU, in-hospital, and 28-day (or 30-day) mortality. In addition, multiple covariates were adjusted in each study and the details are summarized in Table 1.Table 1 Characteristics of eligible studies Author Study design Publish year Region Age Study population Sample size Diagnosis of sepsis BMI category, kg/m2 Outcome Adjusted covariates Wurzinger et al. [28] Retrospective cohort study 2010 Austria  ≥ 18 years Patients with septic shock 301 Sepsis 2.0 Underweight (< 18.5); normal weight (18.5–24.9, ref); overweight (25.0–29.9); obesity (≥ 30.0) ICU mortality Admission year, sex, age, presence of heart disease or chronic renal insufficiency, the number of pre-morbidities, origin of sepsis and the simplified acute physiology score II Pepper et al. [20] Retrospective cohort study 2019 United States  ≥ 20 years Patients with sepsis 55,038 Sepsis 3.0 Underweight (< 18.5); normal weight (18.5–24.9, ref); overweight (25.0–29.9); obesity Class-I (30.0–34.9); obesity Class-II (35.0–39.9); obesity Class-III (≥ 40.0) Short-term mortality Variables which are considered clinically relevant (details are NA) Tay-Lasso et al. [17] Retrospective cohort study 2022 United States  ≥ 18 years Patients with severe sepsis after trauma 1,246 Sepsis 2.0 (sepsis + organ dysfunction, hypotension, or hypoperfusion to 1 or more organs) Underweight (< 18.5); normal weight (18.5–24.9, ref); overweight (25.0–29.9); obesity (30.0–34.9); severe obesity (35.0–39.9); morbid obesity (≥ 40.0) In-hospital mortality Age, alcohol use, hypertension, congestive heart failure, diabetes mellitus, injury severity score, respiratory rate, pulse rate, systolic blood pressure, intensive care unit days, Glasgow coma scale Kuperman et al. [26] Retrospective cohort study 2013 United States  ≥ 18 years Patients with sepsis 792 NA Underweight (< 18.5); normal weight (18.5–24.9, ref); overweight (25.0–29.9); obesity (30.0–39.9); morbid obesity (40.0–49.9) In-hospital mortality Age, race, gender, length of stay, comorbidities, APACHE II score Prescott et al. [24] Retrospective cohort study 2014 United States Older patients (> 50 years) Patients with severe sepsis 1,404 Sepsis 2.0 Normal weight (18.5–24.9, ref); overweight (25.0–29.9); obesity (30.0–34.9); morbid obesity (≥ 40.0) In-hospital, 90-day, and 1-year mortality Age, race, gender, marital status, wealth, acute organ dysfunctions, mechanical ventilation, comorbidities, baseline cognitive status, functional limitations Sakr et al. [16] Prospective cohort study 2008 European multicenter  ≥ 15 years Patients with sepsis 2,878 Sepsis 1.0 Underweight (< 18.5); normal weight (18.5–24.9, ref); overweight (25.0–29.9); obesity (30.0–39.9); morbid obesity (≥ 40.0) In-hospital, 60-day mortality Age, gender, comorbidities, SAPS II score and SOFA score, the type of admission, mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy Lin et al. [19] Retrospective cohort study 2020 United States  ≥ 18 years Patients with sepsis 7,967 Sepsis 3.0 Underweight (< 18.5); normal weight (18.5–24.9, ref); overweight (25.0–29.9); obesity (≥ 30.0) 28-day mortality Age, sex, SOFA, mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, comorbidities, alcohol abuse, drug abuse, depression Danninger et al. [18] Retrospective cohort study 2022 United States NA Patients with sepsis 16,612 Diagnostic code in the eICU Collaborative Research database Underweight (< 18.5); normal weight (18.5–24.9, ref); overweight (25.0–29.9); obesity (≥ 30.0) ICU mortality Age, sex, creatinine concentration, ethnics, heart rate, infection focus, lactate concentration, SOFA score, mechanical ventilation, vasopressor use Gaulton et al. [23] Retrospective cohort study 2014 United States  ≥ 18 years Patients with severe sepsis 1,191 Sepsis 2.0 Underweight (< 18.5); normal weight (18.5–24.9, ref); overweight (25.0–29.9); obesity (30.0–39.9); morbid obesity (≥ 40.0) 28-day mortality Age, APACHE II, intubation, oncology service, initiation of early goal directed therapy, creatinine clearance Gaulton et al. [25] Retrospective cohort study 2015 United States  ≥ 18 years Patients with sepsis 1,779 Similar to sepsis 1.0* Non-obesity (18.5–29.9); obesity (≥ 30.0) 28-day mortality Age, gender, race, year and hospital of admission, length of stay, drug use, positive blood cultures, severity, comorbidities Arabi et al. [27] Retrospective cohort study 2013 Multicenter Adult patients Patients with septic shock 2,882 Sepsis 1.0 Underweight (< 18.5); normal weight (18.5–24.9, ref); overweight (25.0–29.9); obesity (30.0–39.9); morbid obesity (≥ 40.0) In-hospital mortality Age, gender, mechanical ventilation, APACHE II score, chronic co-morbidities, infections, creatinine clearance Chae et al. [15] Prospective cohort study 2013 Korea  ≥ 18 years Patients with severe sepsis or septic shock 770 Sepsis 1.0 Underweight (< 18.5); normal weight (18.5–24.9, ref); obese (≥ 25.0) In-hospital mortality Age, gender, comorbidities, infection focus, SOFA score, serum lactate Li et al. [21] Retrospective cohort study 2019 United States  ≥ 18 years Patients with sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock 5,563 Diagnostic code in the MIMIC-III database Underweight (< 18.5); normal weight (18.5–24.9, ref); overweight (25.0–29.9); obesity (≥ 30.0) 30-day, and 1-year mortality Age, gender, race, marriage status, admission ICU type, MAP, SAPS II, SOFA, surgery Juarez et al. [22] Retrospective cohort study 2019 United States 18–89 years Patients with sepsis or septic shock 312 Sepsis 3.0 Underweight (< 18.5); normal weight (18.5–24.9, ref); overweight (25.0–29.9); obesity Class-I (30.0–34.9); obesity Class-II (35.0–39.9); obesity Class-III (≥ 40.0) In-hospital mortality Age, gender, comorbidities, APACHE II Yeo et al. [14] Prospective cohort study 2023 Korea  ≥ 18 years Patients with sepsis 6424 Sepsis 3.0 Underweight (< 18.5); normal weight (18.5–24.9, ref); overweight (25.0–29.9); obesity (≥ 30.0) In-hospital mortality Age, sex, comorbidities, SOFA score, presence of septic shock, site of infection, type of infection BMI body mass index, Ref reference, NA not available, APACHE II acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II, SOFA sequential organ failure assessment, MAP mean arterial pressure, SAPS II simplified acute physiology score II *About 94.5% positive predictive value for sepsis 1.0 Risk of bias assessment According to the NOS scale, all studies are considered as high quality. Details are provided in Additional file 4. We also focused on the potential confounders as follows: (1) age; Abbate et al. found that the association between obesity and mortality of sepsis was significant in patients aged 50–89 years but not in those aged 20–49 years [10]; (2) study design; retrospective cohort studies are easily subject to bias (e.g., recall bias, data integrity) and prospective studies could better clarify the relationship between obesity and outcomes of interest; (3) diagnostic criteria of sepsis; the specificity and sensitivity of different criteria may be different; (4) severity of sepsis; concerns about hypoventilation and insufficient care in obese patients on general wards may lead to ICU admission of patients with mild infection [8]. Meta-analysis and bias analysis Fifteen studies [14–28] containing 105,159 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The reference groups were patients with normal BMIs (18.5–24.9 kg/m2) while the exposure groups were patients with underweight (< 18.5 kg/m2), overweight (25.0–29.9 kg/m2), obese (30.0–39.9 kg/m2), and morbidly obese BMIs (≥ 40.0 kg/m2). The primary analysis indicated that overweight and obesity were associated with decreased mortality (OR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.70–0.88 and OR: 0.74, 95% CI 0.67–0.82, respectively) while underweight BMIs were associated with increased mortality (OR: 1.31, 95% CI 1.11–1.54). The association between morbid obesity and mortality was not significant (OR: 0.91, 95% CI 0.62–1.32). Please see Fig. 2.Fig. 2 Individual and pooled results of the association of underweight, overweight, obese, and morbidly obese BMIs with mortality in patients with sepsis We then conducted subgroup analyses for patients with underweight, overweight and obese BMIs, according to age, study design, diagnosis and severity of sepsis. Since only six studies [16, 17, 20, 22, 26, 27] reported results including a measure between morbid obesity and mortality, secondary analyses for these patients were not performed. Results of subgroup analyses are displayed in Table 2. In patients aged > 50 years, underweight BMIs were associated with higher mortality (OR: 1.58, 95% CI 1.46–1.71) while overweight and obese BMIs were associated with lower mortality (OR: 0.77, 95% CI 0.67–0.89 and OR: 0.62, 95% CI 0.59–0.65, respectively). In patients aged ≤ 50 years, underweight BMIs were associated with higher mortality (OR: 1.72, 95% CI 1.35–2.19) while the association of overweight and obese BMIs with mortality was not significant (OR: 0.89, 95% CI 0.68–1.14 and OR: 0.77, 95% CI 0.50–1.18, respectively). Please see Additional file 5: Fig. S1A–F. In retrospective studies [17–28], underweight BMIs were associated with increased mortality (OR: 1.26, 95% CI 1.01–1.56) while overweight and obese BMIs were associated with decreased mortality (OR: 0.81, 95% CI 0.73–0.91 and OR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.64–0.80, respectively). In prospective studies [14–16], underweight BMIs were associated with higher mortality (OR: 1.28, 95% CI 1.11–1.47) while overweight and obese BMIs had no impact on mortality (OR: 0.70, 95% CI 0.43–1.13 and OR: 0.85, 95% CI 0.69–1.05, respectively). Please see Additional file 5: Fig. S2A–F. In studies where the diagnoses of sepsis were based on Sepsis 1.0 or 2.0 criteria [15–17, 23–25, 27, 28], underweight and overweight BMIs were not associated with mortality (OR: 1.19, 95% CI 0.89–1.58 and OR: 0.84, 95% CI 0.65–1.10, respectively) while obese BMIs were related to decreased mortality (OR: 0.83, 95% CI 0.74–0.94). In studies where sepsis was diagnosed according to Sepsis 3.0 criteria [14, 19, 20, 22], underweight did not influence the mortality (OR: 1.24, 95% CI 0.95–1.62) while overweight and obese BMIs were associated with lower mortality (OR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.62–0.84 and OR: 0.63, 95% CI 0.59–0.66, respectively). Please see Additional file 5: Fig. S3A–F. In patients with sepsis, underweight BMIs were associated with increased mortality (OR: 1.34, 95% CI 1.13–1.59) while overweight and obese BMIs were associated with decreased mortality (OR: 0.77, 95% CI 0.69–0.86 and OR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.64–0.82, respectively). In patients with severe sepsis or septic shock, underweight and overweight BMIs were not related to mortality (OR: 1.17, 95% CI 0.84–1.61 and OR: 0.80, 95% CI 0.61–1.05, respectively) while obese BMIs were associated with decreased mortality (OR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.69–0.91). Please see Additional file 5: Fig. S4A–F.Table 2 Subgroup analyses according to age, study design, diagnosis and severity of sepsis Underweight Overweight Obesity Age  > 50 years 1.58 (1.46–1.71) 0.77 (0.67–0.89) 0.62 (0.59–0.65)  ≤ 50 years 1.72 (1.35–2.19) 0.89 (0.68–1.14) 0.77 (0.50–1.18) Study design  Retrospective study 1.26 (1.01–1.56) 0.81 (0.73–0.91) 0.72 (0.64–0.80)  Prospective study 1.28 (1.11–1.47) 0.70 (0.43–1.13) 0.85 (0.69–1.05) Diagnostic criteria  Sepsis 1.0 or 2.0 1.19 (0.89–1.58) 0.84 (0.65–1.10) 0.83 (0.74–0.94)  Sepsis 3.0 1.24 (0.95–1.62) 0.72 (0.62–0.84) 0.63 (0.59–0.66) Severity  Patients with sepsis 1.34 (1.13–1.59) 0.77 (0.69–0.86) 0.72 (0.64–0.82)  Patients with severe sepsis or septic shock 1.17 (0.84–1.61) 0.80 (0.61–1.05) 0.79 (0.69–0.91) In addition, the funnel plot for obese BMI groups indicated significant publication bias. Please see Fig. 3.Fig. 3 The funnel plot of the publication bias assessment for obese BMI (30.0–39.9 kg/m2) groups. BMI body mass index Discussion This is an updated meta-analysis, which was designed to evaluate the effects of BMI on mortality of sepsis. Consistent with Pepper et al.’s meta-analysis [8], the present one indicated that overweight and obese BMIs were associated with decreased mortality. However, we included more studies and the results were thereby more convincing with improved statistical power. On the other hand, stricter standards were adopted for study selection in our meta-analysis to control bias. In previous analyses, outcomes including in-hospital, 28-day and 60-day mortality were pooled. In comparison, we only included studies that reported short-term mortality (˂ 30 days). Meanwhile, we excluded studies that used HR as the effect measure (these studies were included in previous pooled analyses), given that HR involves a time factor which could be the possible source of bias. Concerns were raised that significant reduction of mortality may result from methodology in studies rather than increased BMIs themselves [8]. Similarly, Robinson et al. [31] emphasized the importance of stratifying risk factors and controlling for covariates, which are conducive to describe the phenotype of sepsis survivors. Thereby, in the present meta-analysis, subgroup analyses were performed in accordance to potential confounders. Abbate et al. [10] discovered that age may modify the association of BMIs with mortality. We obtained the similar conclusion which suggested that only patients aged over 50 years could benefit from higher BMIs. Pepper et al. [8] also raised concerns about ICU admission of obese and overweight patients with mild infection, which could cause selection bias. Accordingly, we conducted secondary analyses for those diagnosed with severe sepsis or septic shock. Although overweight BMIs did not decrease the risk of death, these patients could still benefit from obese BMIs. Pepper et al.’s [8] pooled analysis of three studies suggested that underweight had no impact on the mortality of sepsis. Our meta-analysis included 12 studies and found that underweight patients, compared with patients with normal BMIs, were at higher risk of death. Similarly, several cohort studies suggested that underweight BMIs was associated with increased mortality, compared with non-underweight BMIs [32–34]. In addition to protective effects of higher BMIs, possible pathophysiological reasons include poor nutritional status, persistent inflammation and catabolism syndrome [35]. It should be noted that the association between underweight BMIs and mortality was not significant in studies, where diagnoses of sepsis were based on the consensus reached in the several international conferences (Sepsis 3.0 or Sepsis 1.0/2.0) [1, 29, 30]. The association between overweight BMIs and mortality are subject to different diagnosis criteria as well. As yet it is unclear whether the diagnosis of sepsis confounded the association of BMI with mortality. However, specificity and sensitivity of other criteria were inferior to those of consensus criteria, and early and rapid identification of sepsis could help to improve clinical outcomes [36]. Therefore, the diagnostic criteria which are not recognized should be avoided in future studies. Two prospective, multicenter studies (Sakr et al. [16] and Yeo et al. [14]) were included in the present meta-analysis, but the results were inconsistent with each other. On one hand, Sakr et al.’s study [16] was conducted during 2002 while Yeo et al.’s study [14] was conducted between 2019 and 2020; the management of sepsis and critical care support in 2002 differed a lot from those nowadays, which could lead to different results. On the other hand, Sakr et al. recruited patients from 24 European countries while Yeo et al.’s study was conducted in multiple centers in Korea. Thus, racial difference may be a possible explanation. We noticed that another prospective single-center study (Chae et al. [15]) from Korea concluded that increased BMIs were not associated with mortality. However, different from Yeo et al.'s study, Chae et al. recruited patients with severe sepsis or septic shock (Yeo et al. recruited patients with sepsis). The association of BMI with mortality was subject to severity of sepsis, which could be a reason for the conflicting results of these two Korean studies. In addition, there remain some limitations, and issues that need be addressed in future researches. First, whether it is reasonable that BMI is used as the only measure of obesity? Although it is calculated according to weight and height measured in ICU settings, biases are still inevitable, especially considering that patients suspected of sepsis may have received fluid resuscitation treatment before ICU admission. Thus, better measure of adiposity such as BMI combined with waist-to-hip ratio, computed tomography/magnetic resonance or bioelectrical impedance should be considered in future studies. Second, the mechanisms behind effects of obesity on mortality have not been fully understood. As summarized in previous systematic review, increased energy stores, beneficial immunoregulation, inactivation of harmful bacterial products and improved renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system function could play roles [8]. However, for the moment, these are not enough to explain the contradictory results of prospective studies. Third, frailty, which affects both weight and mortality, was not considered in most of included studies. It should be regarded as a confounder and be adjusted for in future studies. Finally, we found significant publication bias, which has never been evaluated in previous meta-analyses. This suggested that studies reporting positive results are easier to be published which may overestimate the effects of increased BMIs. Conclusions Our study indicated that overweight and obese BMIs (25.0–39.9 kg/m2) are associated with reduced mortality of patients with sepsis or septic shock, although such survival advantage was not found in all crowds (e.g., patients ≤ 50 years). Considering the protective association of BMI with clinical outcomes found in multiple critical diseases, it seems illogical to negate the discovery of the present meta-analysis. However, the possible BMI measurement bias should not be neglected, and inconsistent results of prospective studies need more reasonable explanations as well. Whether specific factors or potential biases influence the association of BMI with sepsis should be further clarified. Supplementary Information Additional file 1. MOOSE checklist for meta-analyses of observational studies. Additional file 2. Search strategies for all databases. Additional file 3. Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Additional file 4. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale of Included Case-Control or Cohort Studies. Additional file 5. Supplementary figures. Abbreviations BMI Body mass index CI Confidence interval HR Hazard ratio ICU Intensive care units I2 I-squared NOS The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale OR Odds ratio MOOSE Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology RR Relative risk Acknowledgements Not applicable. Author contributions XZ and YX were responsible for the whole study including the design, implementation, and quality control. LB, JH and DW contributed to literature search, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. QZ and TL performed data analyses. LB and DZ were in charge of manuscript writing. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript for submission. Funding None. Availability of data and materials All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article [14–28]. Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate Not applicable. Consent for publication Not applicable. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Le Bai, Jingyi Huang and Dan Wang contributed equally to this work. ==== Refs References 1. Singer M Deutschman CS Seymour CW Shankar-Hari M Annane D Bauer M Bellomo R Bernard GR Chiche JD Coopersmith CM The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3) JAMA 2016 315 8 801 810 10.1001/jama.2016.0287 26903338 2. Rudd KE Johnson SC Agesa KM Shackelford KA Tsoi D Kievlan DR Colombara DV Ikuta KS Kissoon N Finfer S Global, regional, and national sepsis incidence and mortality, 1990–2017: analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study Lancet (London, England) 2020 395 10219 200 211 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32989-7 31954465 3. Wang HE Griffin R Judd S Shapiro NI Safford MM Obesity and risk of sepsis: a population-based cohort study Obesity (Silver Spring, Md) 2013 21 12 E762 769 10.1002/oby.20468 23526732 4. Kaplan JM Nowell M Lahni P Shen H Shanmukhappa SK Zingarelli B Obesity enhances sepsis-induced liver inflammation and injury in mice Obesity (Silver Spring, Md) 2016 24 7 1480 1488 10.1002/oby.21504 27172993 5. Vachharajani V Russell JM Scott KL Conrad S Stokes KY Tallam L Hall J Granger DN Obesity exacerbates sepsis-induced inflammation and microvascular dysfunction in mouse brain Microcirculation 2005 12 2 183 194 10.1080/10739680590904982 15828130 6. Petronilho F Giustina AD Nascimento DZ Zarbato GF Vieira AA Florentino D Danielski LG Goldim MP Rezin GT Barichello T Obesity exacerbates sepsis-induced oxidative damage in organs Inflammation 2016 39 6 2062 2071 10.1007/s10753-016-0444-x 27645696 7. Trivedi V Bavishi C Jean R Impact of obesity on sepsis mortality: a systematic review J Crit Care 2015 30 3 518 524 10.1016/j.jcrc.2014.12.007 25575851 8. Pepper DJ Sun J Welsh J Cui X Suffredini AF Eichacker PQ Increased body mass index and adjusted mortality in ICU patients with sepsis or septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis Crit Care (London, England) 2016 20 1 181 10.1186/s13054-016-1360-z 9. Wang S Liu X Chen Q Liu C Huang C Fang X The role of increased body mass index in outcomes of sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis BMC Anesthesiol 2017 17 1 118 10.1186/s12871-017-0405-4 28859605 10. Abbate LM Perman SM Clambey ET Van Pelt RE Ginde AA Age modifies the association between obesity and mortality in individuals hospitalized with severe sepsis J Am Geriatr Soc 2016 64 4 882 883 10.1111/jgs.14047 27100585 11. Stroup DF Berlin JA Morton SC Olkin I Williamson GD Rennie D Moher D Becker BJ Sipe TA Thacker SB Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group JAMA 2000 283 15 2008 2012 10.1001/jama.283.15.2008 10789670 12. GA Wells BS, D O'Connell, J Peterson, V Welch, M Losos, P Tugwell. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. http://www.ohrica/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxfordasp. 13. Farrah K Young K Tunis MC Zhao L Risk of bias tools in systematic reviews of health interventions: an analysis of PROSPERO-registered protocols Syst Rev 2019 8 1 280 10.1186/s13643-019-1172-8 31730014 14. Yeo HJ Kim TH Jang JH Jeon K Oh DK Park MH Lim CM Kim K Cho WH Obesity paradox and functional outcomes in sepsis: a multicenter prospective study Crit Care Med 2023 51 6 742 752 10.1097/CCM.0000000000005801 36762918 15. Chae MKCD Shin TG Jeon K Suh GY Sim MS Song KJ Jeong YK Jo IJ Body Mass index and outcomes in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock Korean J Crit Care Med 2013 28 4 266 271 10.4266/kjccm.2013.28.4.266 16. Sakr Y Madl C Filipescu D Moreno R Groeneveld J Artigas A Reinhart K Vincent JL Obesity is associated with increased morbidity but not mortality in critically ill patients Intensive Care Med 2008 34 11 1999 2009 10.1007/s00134-008-1243-0 18670756 17. Tay-Lasso E, Grigorian A, Lekawa M, Dolich M, Schubl S, Barrios C, Nguyen N, Nahmias J. Obesity does not increase risk for mortality in severe sepsis trauma patients. Am Surg. 2022:31348221078986. 18. Danninger T Rezar R Mamandipoor B Dankl D Koköfer A Jung C Wernly B Osmani V Underweight but not overweight is associated with excess mortality in septic ICU patients Wien Klin Wochenschr 2022 134 3–4 139 147 10.1007/s00508-021-01912-0 34529131 19. Lin S Ge S He W Zeng M Association between body mass index and short-term clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with sepsis: a real-world study Biomed Res Int 2020 2020 5781913 10.1155/2020/5781913 33123579 20. Pepper DJ Demirkale CY Sun J Rhee C Fram D Eichacker P Klompas M Suffredini AF Kadri SS Does obesity protect against death in sepsis? A retrospective cohort study of 55,038 adult patients Crit Care Med 2019 47 5 643 650 10.1097/CCM.0000000000003692 30789403 21. Li S Hu X Xu J Huang F Guo Z Tong L Lui KY Cao L Zhu Y Yao J Increased body mass index linked to greater short- and long-term survival in sepsis patients: a retrospective analysis of a large clinical database Int J Infect Dis 2019 87 109 116 10.1016/j.ijid.2019.07.018 31357061 22. Juarez EEH Lear M Sanchez A Yang S Nugent K The association between body mass index and outcomes in patient with sepsis and acute respiratory failure Southwest Respir Crit Care Chronicles 2019 7 31 13 23 10.12746/swrccc.v7i31.615 23. Gaulton TG Marshall MacNabb C Mikkelsen ME Agarwal AK Cham Sante S Shah CV Gaieski DF A retrospective cohort study examining the association between body mass index and mortality in severe sepsis Intern Emerg Med 2015 10 4 471 479 10.1007/s11739-015-1200-1 25647585 24. Prescott HC Chang VW O'Brien JM Jr Langa KM Iwashyna TJ Obesity and 1-year outcomes in older Americans with severe sepsis Crit Care Med 2014 42 8 1766 1774 10.1097/CCM.0000000000000336 24717466 25. Gaulton TG Weiner MG Morales KH Gaieski DF Mehta J Lautenbach E The effect of obesity on clinical outcomes in presumed sepsis: a retrospective cohort study Intern Emerg Med 2014 9 2 213 221 10.1007/s11739-013-1002-2 24072354 26. Kuperman EF Showalter JW Lehman EB Leib AE Kraschnewski JL The impact of obesity on sepsis mortality: a retrospective review BMC Infect Dis 2013 13 377 10.1186/1471-2334-13-377 23957291 27. Arabi YM Dara SI Tamim HM Rishu AH Bouchama A Khedr MK Feinstein D Parrillo JE Wood KE Keenan SP Clinical characteristics, sepsis interventions and outcomes in the obese patients with septic shock: an international multicenter cohort study Crit Care (London, England) 2013 17 2 R72 10.1186/cc12680 28. Wurzinger B Dünser MW Wohlmuth C Deutinger MC Ulmer H Torgersen C Schmittinger CA Grander W Hasibeder WR The association between body-mass index and patient outcome in septic shock: a retrospective cohort study Wien Klin Wochenschr 2010 122 1–2 31 36 10.1007/s00508-009-1241-4 20177857 29. Levy MM Fink MP Marshall JC Abraham E Angus D Cook D Cohen J Opal SM Vincent JL Ramsay G 2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definitions Conference Crit Care Med 2003 31 4 1250 1256 10.1097/01.CCM.0000050454.01978.3B 12682500 30. Bone RC Balk RA Cerra FB Dellinger RP Fein AM Knaus WA Schein RM Sibbald WJ Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. The ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference Committee. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine Chest 1992 101 6 1644 1655 10.1378/chest.101.6.1644 1303622 31. Robinson J Swift-Scanlan T Salyer J Obesity and 1-year mortality in adults after sepsis: a systematic review Biol Res Nurs 2020 22 1 103 113 10.1177/1099800419876070 31533460 32. Roh J Jo EJ Eom JS Mok J Kim MH Kim KU Park HK Lee MK Yeom S Lee K Factors predicting long-term survival of patients with sepsis on arrival at the emergency department: a single-center, observational study Medicine 2019 98 33 e16871 10.1097/MD.0000000000016871 31415425 33. Sato T Kudo D Kushimoto S Hasegawa M Ito F Yamanouchi S Honda H Andoh K Furukawa H Yamada Y Associations between low body mass index and mortality in patients with sepsis: a retrospective analysis of a cohort study in Japan PLoS ONE 2021 16 6 e0252955 10.1371/journal.pone.0252955 34101752 34. Oami T Karasawa S Shimada T Nakada TA Abe T Ogura H Shiraishi A Kushimoto S Saitoh D Fujishima S Association between low body mass index and increased 28-day mortality of severe sepsis in Japanese cohorts Sci Rep 2021 11 1 1615 10.1038/s41598-020-80284-3 33452302 35. Gentile LF Cuenca AG Efron PA Ang D Bihorac A McKinley BA Moldawer LL Moore FA Persistent inflammation and immunosuppression: a common syndrome and new horizon for surgical intensive care J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2012 72 6 1491 1501 10.1097/TA.0b013e318256e000 22695412 36. Kim M Watase T Jablonowski KD Gatewood MO Henning DJ A sepsis-related diagnosis impacts interventions and predicts outcomes for emergency patients with severe sepsis West J Emerg Med 2017 18 6 1098 1107 10.5811/westjem.2017.7.34770 29085543